The Sun. — London, England, 1864-12-09 00:00:00

Itr Seymour Fitzgerald, M,P, on public Matters. HORSHAM, Thursday. The Horsham Christmas Cattle Show took place yesterday, and was generally considered the best that has been held. At the dinner, in the afternoon, the chair was taken, as usual, by Mr Seymour :Fitz.. geral, M.P., and amongst the guests were Mr Cave, M.P., Sir P. Burrell, M,P., Major Aldridge, Mr Sanctuary, the Rev. S. Hodgson (the vicar), the Rat. F. Vincent, Mr Cr. Fitzgerald, Mr C. S. Dickens, &c. The usual loyal and constitutional toasts having been given, Major ALDRIDGE proposed' The Health of the Members for the rape of Bramber, Mr Cave and Sir F. Burrell," expressing his regret at the unavoid able absence of the numbers for the western divi sion, Captain Wyndham and Colonel Barttelot. The toast was acknowledged by Mr Cara and Sir P. Burrell. Mr CAVE then proposed " Th© Health of the Chairman," which was received with great enthn. oiaara. Mr FITZGERALD, when the cheering had subsided, said—l should be indeed insensible if I did not feel deeply the kind way in which you have received my health. This is, I think, the tenth or eleventh time that from this place I have had to return thanks for the same compliment. I have not had the privilege and advantage of spending my summer, autumn, and winter months amongst my neighbours and friends; but I am certain from what has been said to me that my family and myself have your sympathy, as shown upon an occasion like this, when, notwith standing my inability to perform my duties as a neighbour and friend, you receive me in that kindly manner which does most unaffectedly touch me in my tenderest affections. (Cheers.) As it is so long since I had the opportunity of meeting you, I must trespass on your attention, but do not intend doing so at any great length. I have always found a great difficulty in my communications with this borough of Horsham. It is in itself a peculiar—one may almost say a model borough. The communica. tions between the members of this constituency and their representatives are always few and far be. tweet'. I believe I can safely say that which no other member of that Government, or almost any other Government could say, that during the whole of the time I was in office, with the exception of a small application for one little favour, I never was asked for a single piece of patronage by any elec• tor of Horsham, or by any one connected with any elector of Horsham. (Cheers.) If you take any borough, great or small, throughout the length and breadth of the land, I do not believe there is any other member of the House of Commons who can make the same declaration. The infrequency of com. munication between a member and his constituents tends unfavourably towards the member to a cer tain extent, and it affects me in this way. This is almost the only great public meeting that can take place in this borough. Of course I am perfectly aware that if I were merely to talk on farming topics those around me would think that I was not per. forming my duty, and was not doing that which was fairly expected of me at a meeting like this. Still, politics are forbidden, and I can only attempt to perform my duty in this way, to avoid anything in the nature of controversial politics, and speak only on those public questions which are interesting alike to both sides of the house. (Hear.) Now, some of the questions that have come before Parliament this year are of great interest and importance, affect. ing both our foreign relations and our domestic le. gislation. It has often been said to me that the party with whom I act have done wrong in moot ing questions affecting perhaps our relations with foreign countries—probably on questions affecting our domestic interests—when we were not likely to succeed. Now, permit me to say this—and it is an observation which I may fairly make, both to those who have supported me and to those who are op posed to me—that the position of thou who are in op position is as responsible a position, and one entailing as high duties as those which fall upon men possess ing the confidence of the Crown and discharging the highest functions of the State, because there are al ways two that must affect any man who takes a pro. minent part in the discussion of public questions in the House:of Commons. He must, on the one hand, as far as he can, give effect to his own convictions—convictions that he has an. nounced, that he has never attempted to conceal, which are patent to those who have sent him to the House of Commons, in which to a certain ex tent, they are supposed to participate, and which, if his opinions and convictions are worth anything, he is bound as an honest man to endeavour to carry out. But on the other hand, in the present state of the country and of public opinion, and of the House of Commons, this consideration must also weigh with him,—whether it is always worth while to give effect to those distinct convictions, seeing that such a course may lead to a complication in public affairs ? And, therefore, although he may still honestly maintain his own opinions—although he may still, to a certain extent, honestly and fear• lessly express them—he may often not desire to bring them to the test of a division in the House of Commons ; because there always arises this great question, which the Duke of Wellington proposed to himself and his colleagues—How is the Queen's Government to be carried on, (Hear, hear.) Now I do hold, that while upon great and important questions it is the bounden duty of every honest man, who is a member of the Opposition, to give . effect to the principles which he feels deeply and knows to be right,—l think there aro often occasions on which a high regard to great public interests may load him not to pursue those questions to a serious issue, and may induce him rather to give support to the Government, although on general questions he may differ from them. (Hear, hear.) I have said that there are occasions when the convictions of men are so deep, and the principles involved are so serious, that although it may not be possible for them to obtain a majority in the House of Com, mons, yet looking to the character of the principles which they support—lcoking to the nature of the interests involved—and looking more to the effect which discussion, debate, and a sifting of all the circumstances and arguments may have on the pub. lie mind—it is of the utmost importance that an Opposition, although they may not achieve success, should bring these great questions to an issue in the House of 'Commons. (Cheers.) Now I am not going to enter at any length into the Danish ques tion. If you were as sick and as weary of the name of Denmark as I have been for many months, when night after night we had to extract informa tion, to inquire as to the policy of the Government, to keep the matter constantly before the House, you would desire me to say nothing at all upon the sub. ject. I am not going to enter into the merits of the cause, but I wish to say a few words in order to justify the conduct which I, as one of those prin cipally concerned in the matter, took with reference to the Danish question in the House of Commons. (Hear.) I have said elsewhere what I now repeat. The question we decided upon placing before the House was not the question whether it was desira ble to interfere between Denmark and Germany or not. There is no doctrine that has been more coat• gently held by the leaders of the Conservative party—there is none which I myself have for years more consistently a d voca t e d an d urge d. It w as dig nified by the eloquence of Sir R. Peel. It received in those days the full support of Mr Gladstone. There h is been n o doctrine that has been more conspicuously an element of Conservative policy than this principle, that we should not interfere in the domestic affairs of our neighbours, and that we should hold the doctrine of what is called nonintervention. I claim for the Conservative party that this doctrine was put forward by them. I will not say first put forward, because it was first put for ward by the illustrious Lord Castlereagh and Lord Liverpool ; but in later times I claim it for the Conservative party, because for years before it was adopted by any other party in the State it was one of the leading features of their political creed. (Cheers.) But the ques tion we desired to raise before the House of Commons was this—Whether the conduct pur sued by England was such as had fairly led the Danes to expect assistance, and had led the rest of the world to expect that we should inter fere? (Hear.) I will not enter into the question at large, but I will say this, that it was one of the remarkable features of that great debate, that with the exception of one man, who made a halting and a lame defence—half blaming, and not half praising—there was not another man - - )n the other side of the house, with the exception cf the Minis , ters thenisolves who defended the position in which this country found itself. (Hear, hear.) We may have been right or we may have been wrong; but entertaining the opinions we slid, we should have been wanting iu duty to the country, we should have been wanting in respect to ourselves if we bad not challenged not only the opinions of the house but of the country on the issue which we desired to present. (Cheers.) In the course of the debates, and in the articles which I read in the newspapers, I see often insinuated, often stated boldly, the vulgar insinua tion that any step that is taken in Parliament is for the mere desire of place or power. Well, if it be an object of just ambition to take the lead in the coon oils of the country, to direct its energies, to assist in the application of its wealth, by means of its great and varied influence to mould and guide the opinion of other countries—if it be the object of public men to make the influence, and the name, and the character of this country felt, then I say that is a noble ambition—(cheers)—and it is totally different and diverse from the grovelling and low insinuations which are made in public journals and speeches only by those who are incapable of feeling the higher ambition of the two. (Loud cheers.) For myself I would say, that however humble my position in the Government might be, I would sooner have my name recorded in history as having done ray best to develop the interests of the coun try—to promote liberal, true, and enlightened prin ciples all over the world —to make the name and reputation of this great country felt and respected, than as having laid the foundation of the greatest fortune ever raised in the land. (Cheers.) I have said that our object was to obtain the opinion of the country on the question to which I have alluded. It is true that the opinion of the House of Commons by a certain small majority was against us. I will not enter into the party reason which made the majority smaller or greater, or any majority at all. This is not a question to be dis cussed here. But I will say this, that we did a great deal of good, because I am sure that we elicited from the country a decided opinion as to what should be our future conduct with regard to foreign nations and our future foreign policy, and that is et lesson which no Minister can ever forget. 1 do not say that in the sense in which it has been taken up by Mr Cobden and others who have addressed great publie meetings. They say that that debate has constituted a new era in our foreign policy; tbat for the future we are to remain isolated in the family of nations, that we are to close our ears to the complaints that reach us, that we are to shut our eyes to the events that pass around ns, and that so long as we can drive a big and thriving trade we are to adopt the policy of not interfering in the affairs of our neighbours, and to remain in strict seclusion and isolation from the rest of the world. Now I say, in the first place, that I believe that to be impossible ; and then that if it were possible it would be mean and dis graceful. (Hear, hear.) It is a most inconsistent policy to be advocated by men of such distinction as Mr Cobden and Mr Bright, For what do they do ? They say we are to remain in this isolated position amongst all the nations of the world; and yet wherever they meet their countrymen they do not discuss merely the question of cotton if they are in Lancashire, or of oxen and sheep if they are in Sus sex, but they address themselves to great public questions that interest the heart of England and of Europe too. And having thus tried to educate public opinion—having con victions of their own, in some of which I cordially concur, but from others of which I differ—they urge those convic tions with all the force of eloquence and all the influence of character. They do their best to educate the public opinion upon a given publie subject—they enlist the public sympa thy in the question on which they address their fellow countrymen—and then they think that it would be possible for a Government to remain in a state of cold isolation, and not be affected by that public sympathy which they them selves have been the first to raise and foster. (Hear, hear.) Now, mind, I do not at all blame these gentlemen for taking this position before their countrymen. On the contrary, I think it is desirable that the public opinion of the country should not only be brought to have its due weight and in fluence on the Government of the country, but that the opinion of an enlightened nation such as this, holding the foremost rank among the natious of the world, should have its just, its legitimate influence and weight in the councils of sovereigns, where it is required, and upon the destinies of nations wherever it can be properly exer cised. (Cheers.) It is the doctrine of these gentlemen that we are not in any way to in'erfere, because they say that the expression of opinion, unless it is to be folio wed up by active measures, is a course we ought to avoid. Now it is there I differ from them. They say that we ought not to have interfered with reference to the question between Denmark and Germany. Now I do not agree with them. What has been the result of all that has been passing on the continent of Europe within the last few months ? Look at Prussia. Prussia has one of the most intellectual people in Europe, has a great army, has an important strategic mili tary position, and is certainly a country that ought to be one of the greatest leading powers, influencing the destinies of the world. The people of that country—educated, intellec tual, and liberal in their aspirations, have long wished to possess that great blessing which we now enjoy in the shape of constitutional liberty ; and I am sure there is no English man here, or in any part of the country, who, valuing the privileges which he himself enjoys, would not say, " It will be a blessed day when these privileges are extended to other parts of the world." (Cheers.) Now, the position of Prussia before the recent war was th's. There existed every hope that-a wider extension of constitutional government would be given by the King of Prussia. But what has been the result ? Every liberal aspiration is extinguished. There is no hope of freedom at this moment in the length and breadth of Prussia. Everything is under military rule. All that they look at is an extension of territory, and an increase of military prestige. Is that, looking in the widest and most liberal sense upon the map of Europe—is that what any Englishman would desire ? Go a letde further south. Look at Austria. Some three short years ago we had every hope of seeing a wide extension of constitutional privileges and liberty in Austria. There was established a Parliament—l will not say upon the model of our own—but yet having similarities and traced out in some measure upon the shape and form of our own. We saw that instituted, and we entertained hopes that the effects of it would be great and advantageous. But what is the result ? I will not say they have gone back— because they have not—but every prospect of progress is stopped. There is a direct, and close, and in timate union between the despotic military governments of Europe; and that which promised the fairest fields for constitutional liberty is now a blank desert, and none of us can look to it with hope or anticipation. (Hear, hear.) I am only pointing out those things as illustrative of my own opinion, which I submit for your acceptance. (Cheers.) And it is this —that while I hold it to be the bounden duty of every man who holds an important position in the councils of his country not to engage hastily, nor to pledge the country by an ill-advised proceeding, by an ill-con ceived despatch, to interference in the domestic affairs of another country—while we hold ourselves aloof as far as we can from interfering in the affairs of those around us— yet to sit down in a cold isolation,to say we will have nothing to do with our neighbours, to tie up our knockers and close our doors and say, " We will have nothing to do with you," is an impossible policy in the first instance, and would be mean and degrading to us as a nation ; and beyond that, looking to the interests which providence has committed to our care—not only the promotion of liberty amongst those around us, but the extension of liberty amongst all the nations of the world—it is impossible for us to remain in that state of isolation, and we must make our name, our character, and our weight felt in every quarter of the globe. (Cheers.) There is one other topic to which I will just refer, and that is an important speech recently delivered by one whom I am proud to have called in past times a colleague of mine, and of whom I may say this—that it is only a very few public questions at all that we have ever had the slightest difference of opinion, but have been found acting together in cordial harmony. The speech to which I allude was that recently delivered by Lord Stanley, and he has ex pressed one opinion in which I cannot agree. He has said that he viewed with no repugnance the establishment of two great military monarchies in Germany in the place of those which at present rule the destinies of that country. For my own part I have never found, either in history or in late experience, that a military monarchy, which in fact amounts to nothing more or less than a mili tary despotism, is conducive either to the liberty of the people or to the peace of the world. So far from that, believing as I do that the development of constitutional goe vernment among the nations of Europe is that which, as a it is that for which we ourselves hav e struggled—we ought principle, we are bound as far as we can to acknowledge—for to look forward to their struggles with hope, and very san guine anticipations. Believing also that the existence of constitutional government will go farther to secure the peace of Europe, and consequently the spread of all its bless ings amongst the nations which obtain that constitutional government, I deprecate as far as I can any transaction that shall establish in the heart of Europe those two great military monarchies, because I do not believe them likely to conduce to the welfare of Europe and the peace of the world. It has been said that, with the exception of that des bate, that the session was a dull one, and that we did very little. It is not for me, or for any member of Parliament, to say what good we do ; but of this I am quite certain, that the public are wrong in judging of the value of the labours of members of l'arliareout by an test of the great and important divisions and party questions that may arise. / There is a vast amount of legislation quietly carried on, to which some of the most intelligent, energetic, and active minds in Parliament are constantly devoted. A great de gree of attention is required to those subjects on the part of every man who seeks to gain anything like an important position in Parliament, of which the public are totally un aware, but which is of the greatest value to the public inte rests ; and I am perfectly sure of this—although at the present time there is a wide distinctien between both silos of the house—there are a groat many questions affecting the interests of the country to which the minds of men on both sides are directed,and in respect of which the public are indebted to them for their constant and incessant la bours, and their best and most devoted energies. Passing from last year, let me say a word or two as to the future. We are tcld that next year—because we are going in a short time to present ourselves to our constituents, probably in the middle of the next summer—that the next session will be one which no great questions will be discussed, and that it will be a humdrum, short, stupid session, something like the latter days of an old man who sits in his arm chair reading the newspaper, and does no good with re gard to anybody. (Laughter.) That is said to bo our position. Now Ido not believe it. I believe there are ques tions that may probably come before us of the greatest im portance to every one of us—questions which I do not think will raise much difference between the two sides of the house so far as principle is concerned. 'We are told there is to be great retrenchment in the public expenditure. Well, I suppose we aro all taxpayers, and there is no man who pays taxes who does not wish to see those taxes reduced. (Hear.) There is not a single man throughout the country who does not feel acutely the demand made upon him by the tax gatherer for the immediate payment of a tax. (Hear, hear.) We are told the reductions are to take place with regard to the army and the navy. Now I wish to say a word or two on that subject. There is no one who is not aware of this fact that the matter does not rest with the opinions of members of Parliament, but that Parliament being the reflection of the opinion of the country, it rests with all of you who aro taxpayers to say in what respect retrenchment shall take place—how far they will approve of it, and how far they disapprove of it. I will first take the case of the army. lam one of those who sit side by side with other members on the front benches of the Opposition in the House of Commons. We have been of opinion for some:years that the military expenditure of the country might have been re duced without in the slightest degree endangering the effi ciency of that branch of our establishment. I believe that to Le the case at the present time, and I am certain there is not one man amongst those who take a prominent and leading part in the debates in the House of Commons on our side of the house, who will not be found ready to support to the very utmost any ouch reduction in the estimates for the army as shall not interfere with the efficiency of that most important service. (Cheers.) It has been pointed out over and over again that the great expenditure incurred is not in the main tenance of an efficient army or equipping it in a proper man ner; neither is it in the cost of those great works which have been undertaken for the fortification of our harbours and ar senals, respecting which some difference of opinion existed. These are not the points where there is any possibility of great retrenchment. For I defy anyone to look into our military establishments and not to see this—that one great source of expenditure, which is not the hundreds and thousands, but the millions, that disappear in the most ex traordinary manner is in keeping up not an army of soldiers but an army of clerks. (Hear, hear.) Ido not believe that the time will ever come when this country will be saved by an army of clerks, and I hope the time will never arrive when it may be necessary to save it by an army of our gal lant defenders in the field, but if money is to be expended— if the taxes are to be raised—if you are to feel the pressure of maintaining the efficiency of our military establishments, let it be in providing an efficient army, and not in providing an army of clerks. (Cheers.) Well, now with reference to the navy. There I think the case is different. I do not see my way to any great and important reduction in that ser vice. I believe that a certain economy may be judiciously exercised, but our navy is in a state of transition, and I think no Government in this country ought to be satisfied until we have upon the seas the most perfect and efficient navy that modern science and the resources of the country can provide. (Cheers) That navy we do not possess at present. 'We have one or two fine vessels, but it is very doubtful whether these will be the type for the construction of.our fleets for the future. We do not possess the best artil lery that should be applicable to the purposes of warfare at sea, and until we possess the finest vessels in the world and the finest artillery also, we ought not to falter in our course or haggle about money. but use our utmost endeavours to plaee the country in thatposition which she has always occu pied, and which I hope she will still continue to occupy. (Cheers,) There is one other subject on which I should like to say a word, not with the view of intimating my own opi nion so much as with the desire of meeting insinuations or objections that have been directed against those with whom fur many years I have had the honour to act. The time may be near, may be very near, when again the question of representative reform may be introduced to the constituencies of the country. lam Rot going to enter into the merits of any past scheme or to bore you by any practical reference to that question ; but at the present moment this tone is taken by men who address great public constituencies and meet ings in the country. They say :—" The country at the present time may not be active in demanding Reform, but what we desire to point out is, that the aristocracy and the dominant class desire to keep the working man from the enjoyment of his rights and privileges," and they try by that means to raise a class feeling on the part of the working men against the aristocracy, the landed class, those who are placed over them in this country. What I wish to say is this, that there never was a greater libel uttered against the leading and higher classes in this country than such an insinuation. (Hear, hear.) I will ask you to look through the history of the last few years and say whether it is a fact that the landed gentry, the aristocracy, the clergy, have shown themselves adverse to the rights of the working classes. Take the instance of the committee which is now distributing the magnificent bounty of the nation to those who are suffering from poverty and distress in Lan cashire. Who is it that is devoting not merely hours but days and nights to the constant and most laborious inves tigation of every case—to the investigation of figures the most minute—to labours which gentlemen engaged in com merce would shrink from attempting ? is it one of them ? Is it the gentlemen who are agitating on public platforms and saying we are the masters of the working men ? No; it is the man who is in the proudest position as regards rank and wealth, who only the other day was Prime Mini ster of England, and who at this moment holds as high a place in the affections of the working men of Lancashire as he does of respect and admiration among the higher classes of his countrymen. (Loud cheers.) I wish not to throw a slur on those who are connected with the great com mercial transactions of the country —on such men as Sir W. Brown, Sir Frank Crossley, or Sir David Baxter—men who have made their wealth by the toil of their artisans and workmen, and have spent their money in a munificent and princely manner for the benefit of those around them ; who have earned some of the highest distinctions which the Sovereign could confer upon them, and the greatest respect amongst their own class. I am not claiming any undue merit for the landed gentry; but there are agit: tors who go among the working classes and tell them that the higher classes are interfering between them and their natural rights. (Hear, hear.) Why, who was it that in past years secured for the working class—for the women and children throughout the manufacturing dise tricts, a diminution in the hours of labour ? Was it these men who are now agitating on every platform in England? No ;it was the landed gentry who took the lead--it was the aristocracy—those who are held up as the enemies of the working man, who secured for them the:benefits which they now enjoy. (Cheers.) I do not intend to enter into the question of Representative Reform. I hope no one will make this question of Reform, after it has been dropped for years, the stepping-stone to popularity, in order to agitate the country in the expectation of an election, in the vain hope, as I believe, of continuing themselves in power by ap• pealing to prejudices and passions which may easily be worked upon, particularly at a time when there is great dis tress existing. (Hear, hear.) I will only say this, that I believe there is no class of men more anxious to have a just extension of the franchise consistent with the Conservative institutions of the country than those who have so long been the leaders of the Conservative party, But the difficulty is that no plan has yet been proposed for the enlargement of the suffrage, which, while extending it to a lower class, should not extend it so largely as to enable that class to sweep away all the other interests of the country. lam not going to have anything to do with a Reform Bill. But it is for the Ministry which stakes its reputation upon giv ing this bows to the working classes to show that it can be given consistently with the maintenance of those institu tions which one and all are determined to uphold. (Cheers.) I am ashamed of having spoken so long; but as I have not had the opportunity of addressing you recently, and i as I shall not be able for some time to take up my resi dence amongst you, and profit by that constant inter- I change of opinion with those whose confidence I t have enjoyed for so many years, I have ventured to trespass more at length than I have done on previous occasions. But I I trust that nothing I have said has grated upon the feeling of any one, although he may differ from me in political opinion ; for that was not my object in the remarks which I have addressed to you. (Hear.) I have referred to the state of Europe. I believe we are approaching serious times. The differences between nations are now likely to ba not quarrels upon political circumstances or events as they have been in past times, but they are likely to be differences arising from diversity of origin, from matters of religion, and from other questions of great principle. Ido look for word to the growth of the military spirit on the Continent with great apprehension and alarm. I look forward to this intimate understanding between great military Powers with more than alarm. I think there are dark and gloomy days before us. But I believe, it this country is true to itself. whatever storms may arise, however the winds may blow from every part of Europe, whatever the dangers that may menace us, this country can hold its own, as for many a year it has held its own, and that its reputation and influ ence with the world will remain as paramount as ever it has been in years gone by. The hon gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud and pro longed cheering. Several other toasts were afterwards given and responded to, and the party then separated. Court of Common Council, A Court of Common Council was held yesterday at Guildhall. The Lord Mayor presided. THE TRAFFIC OVER SOUTHWARK-BRIDGE. Mr LONGDEN inquired of the Chairman of the Bridge House Estates Committee whether any steps had been taken to ascertain the amount of increase of traffic over South wark-bridge consequent upon the abolition of the toll. Mr WEBBER, the Chairman of the Bridge House Com mittee, said that a return had been furnished to him, by which it appeared that on the first day of the opening of the bridge 12,000 foot passengers passed over it, and on the sixth that number was increased to 15,900. For the same period the number of cabs was respectively 931, and 1,615 ; of single-horse carts 411 and 859; and of two-horse carts, 60 and 134. These numbers, he was informed, had, since that period, considerably increased; but he thought it right to inform the Court that the returns were supplied to him by persons employed by the bridge company, and ha consi dered it would be as well that persons should be employed by the Corporation to check the future returns. In answer to a questbn put by anoth er h on , mem b er , as to the amount of heavy truffle that passed over the bridge, Mr WEBBER said that only five four-horse waggons passed over the bridge on the first day, and six on the sixth. THE PROPOSED:NEW COURTS OP JUSTICE, The RxMEMBRANCER reported to the Court that he had reeeived from the Government the drafts'of two bills in tended to be introduced into Parliament in reference to the erection of new courts of law, and as to the mode of raising the means to defray the cost thereof. The Government were very anxious to proceed with the matter,and the drafts of the bills had been sent thus early in order that the Con poration might have an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon the subject. The matter was referred to tho City Lands Committee. INSURANCE OF CORPORATION PROPERTY. Mr R. J. CHAPLIN brought forward a motion that it should be submitted to the City Lands Committee to take into consideration whether it would not be advisable that the valuable property comprised in the Guildhall and the sur rounding buildings _should be adequately insured against any loss by fire. Deputy BONE said that the Corporation had hitherto always been their own insurers, and he doubted the pro. priety of altering that system. If they insured the Guild. hall they must insure all the other property belonging to the Corporation, and thus a very large outlay would :be incurred. He suggested, therefore, that the matter should be referred to the City Lands Committee for them to con sider whether it would be advisable that any alteration should be made. Mr CHAPLIN said he had no objection to this being done. His only object was to let it be known that the whole of the valuable property in the Guildhall, and the still more valu able property contained in the Mansion-house were en tirely unprotected by an insurance against fire, and the Court would deal with the...matter as it thought best. THE RAILWAY INVASION OF THE CITY. Deputy LOTT, the chairman of the Special Railway Com mittee appointed to consider the different railway schemes submitted to Parliament last session, affecting the city of London, brought up a report of their proceedings, and ask ing to be allowed to continue to act in watching any new schemes that might beiatroduced. There was also a report from the same committee of the amount of money they had expended. By this last mentioned report it appeared that the gross amount expended in opposing the ten schemes that had been introduced into Parliament during last ses. sion, the whole of which more or less affected the City of London, was close upon £4,000, of which sum £750 was paid in fees to the Recorder, about £9OO to the Common Serjeant, and the total amount of fees paid to counsel was considerably more than £2,000. Mr Haywood, the engineer to the Commissioners of Sewers, had, it appeared, also sent in a claim for £2lO, which was included in the 4000. The rest was made up of parliamentary fees and other expenses. These reports gave rise to rather a warm discussion. Deputy LOT; in moving that they should be agreed to, adverted to the alarm that was created among the citizens of London by the mode in which the projectors of different railways proposed to deal with property in the City, and said that the schemes, as originally proposed, would have interfered with no less than 130 streets in different parts of the City, and a vast amount of valuable property would have been destroyed. These proposals, as the Court would recollect, were received with very great alarm, not only by the bankers and merchants of the City, but by all classes ; and the committee were deeply impressed with the impor tance of the duty which had been confided to them, and the result of their operations before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, was that some of the projects were re jected, and others were modified in some most important respects, and the result he believed was ono on which the City might congratulate itself. He at the same time said he could not deny that the expense that had been incurred was considerable, but the committee felt itself bound to procure the services of the most eminent counsel, and to take all the steps in their power to carry out the object they hid in view, and he trusted the Court would consider that the coma mittee had done its duty in the proceedings they had carried out. (Hear, hear.) Mr BE JERSEY said he thought the Court ought not to sanction the expenditure of so large a sum as £l,OOO without some farther inquiry, and at all events ascertaining whether the money had been properly expended. They should re • member that the Corporation had no solicitor to pay, and that the whole of this large sum consisted of costs out of pocket. He should therefore propose, with a view to a fur ther investigation taking place, that those reports should be referred to the Law and Parliamentary Committee for them to take into consideration and report to the Court as to the propriety of the payments that had been made. (Hear.) Mr M. GEORGE said that although he was one of the members of the select committee, he felt obliged to Mr De Jersey for the observations he had made, and ho could not deny that the cost of the proceedings that had been taken was extravagant. It appeared that £2,900 was paid in fees to counsel, and of this sum, two of their own officers, the Recorder and the Common Sergeant, received, the one £750 and the other nearly £l,OOO. With regard to the sum of 200 guineas that was claimed by Mr Haywood, the committee were certainly surprised that he should h ave ma d e suc h a claim,as e they acting in conj unc ti on with the Com m s rs they sdp posed that he, as the en gineer of that body, was engaged in th e i r b e h alf, i i nof Sewers, were and Mr DE JERSEY said the Commissioners of Sewers were not aware that such a claim as the one referred to had been made by Mr Haywood. Mr A. L. TAYLOR expressed his opinion that it was time this special committee was done away with, and he at the same time said that although one of its members had at tempted to make a great deal out of the fact of Mr Haywood tho engineer to the Commissioners of Sewers, having set in a claim for 200 guineas, he did not say anything about what was paid to the two higher officera of the corporation—the Recorder and Common Sergeant, lie considered the fees gaid to these gentlemen were very large, particularly when it was remembered they received a large salary from the corporation. He did not see, however, that anything could be done with reference to this portion of the subject, nor how the fees could be reduced. [ t voice—They are paid.] (A laugh.) He hoped that such a state of things would not occur again, and so far as this committee was concerned he thought that the sooner it was disembodied the better. Alderman ROSE, M.P., supported the report, and said that in his opinion it would be a very anomalous state of things if one committee was to be allowed to sit in judgment upon the proceedings of another. With regard to the fees to counsel, there was a recognised scale of fees to bo paid to counsel who appeared before a c ommittee of the House of Commons, and nothing more than the usual fees had been paid. Mr HARTRIDGE argued that the sum of £4,000 was not at all unreasonable for the work that had been done. (Hear, hear.) There were ten different bills to oppose, and the Cor poration in opposing them had this additional difficulty thrown in their way, that there was already a foregone con clusion arrived at by the Parliament; that there should be an inner circle of railways in the metropolis. The utmost exertions were required to oppose successfully the schemes that were proposed, and he could himself bear testimony to the extreme zeal and ability with which the points had been argued before the committee by the Common Serjeant and the other learned counsel engaged. Deputy ELLIOTT said it appeared to him that there was nothing that could now be done except to pay the money— (hear, hear, and a laugh)—and that the debate that had taken place was what and he would add that ho thought that the f ees that had been paid counsel were h h t o b e e n c t a i l r l e e l d y a c n o indignation i d t e . bate, a H t e e , enormous—more than £2,000 being given to three of their own well-paid officers, (Hear, hear.) He hoped that such a crying evil would be stopped for the future. (Hear, hear.) Mr G. J. COCKERELL expressed his opinion that £4,000 was a very small sum when compared with the important results that were obtained through the exertions of this committee, and he said that every ono who was acquainted with the expense incurred in opposing bills in Parliament must agree with him. Deputy FRY said it appeared to him that the Court were taking a most undignified course on the present occasion. The select committee had, in his opinion, done a very great public service— (hear, hear)—and had done the City a very important service, and it was objected to pay for that ser vice, (Hear, hear.) Deputy LOTT then briefly replied, and in the course of his observations he reminded the Court that the Recorder and the Common Serjeant had both accepted their offices p pon the understandin g th at they were to be pa id f or their ser vices when they were specially retained on behalf of the Corporation, and -nothing more than the usual amount of fees were paid to them. Mr DE JERSEY said that he was satisfied with the dis cussion which had taken place, and he should not press his amendment. Mr 11, L. TAYLOR then said that he should not offer any further opposition to the reports, except with regard to the continuance of the committee. In his opinion that was quite unnecessary, as the Remembrancer was bound to be perfectly well aware of the nature of every bill which was brought before Parliament, and the Law and Parliamentary Committee, which was a large committee, and of which the chairman of every one of the other committees was a mem ber, was perfectly competent to deal with the subject. He should therefore wove all as a woudraeut that the portion ok the report which recommended the continuation of the commltee should not be agreed to. This amendment was carried upon a division bye majority of 20, and the other portions of the reports were agreed to, THE SUPPLY OF GABTO THE CITY. Petitions were presented by Sir F. G. Moon and Deputy Reed, from the inhabitants of the ward of Portsoken and Cripplegate, praying the Court to take some steps far the relief of the inhabitants from thd injurious monopoly they now suffered in the supply of gap, and to have the supply increased, the quality improved, and the price lowered. The Court was also prayed to take the necessary steps to procure an act of Parliament to enable the Corporation to supply the consumers within the City, and thus put an end to the present unsatisfactory, expensive, and insufficient supply. A number of the inhabitants of the wards in question attended in support of their petitions, and in answer to ques tions put to them by several members of the Court, they expressed themselves in strong terms with reference to the bad quality and insufficient supply of gas furnished to them by the different companies. A short discussion ensued, during which Deputy LOTT expressed his opinion that the carburetting system—or the " tin pots," as he termed them, filled with naphtha, that were placed in the street lamps—was the cause of their giving so little light. Eventually both petitions were referred to the Genera Purposes Committee. The Court shortly afterwards adjourned. LAW INTELLIGENCE,--Dec. 8, COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. (Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and a Common Jury,) IVE V, EDWARDS, This was an action brought by the plaintiff, an omnibus conductor, against the defendant, an agent carrying on business at 15, Union-court, Old Broad-street, City, to re cover the sum of £lOO, money received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded, first, not guilty ; secondly, payment ; and thirdly, set off. Mr Huddles ton, Q.C., and Mr Henry James, were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr Field, Q.C., Mr Morgan Howard, and Mr Thomas Geary for the defendant. It appeared from the evidence of the plaintiff that in the month of July, 1863, he met with a serious accident upon the Eastern Counties Railway, and being a member of a friendly club he was attended by the club surgeon, Dr Roberts, of Great Dover-street, Southwark, who said that the defendant was a practical man, who would undertake the claim against the company for damages. Accordingly the plaintiff agreed to let him undertake the matter, which he did, and in January following the plaintiff received, through Roberts, the sum of £lOO, with a deduction of £3O for expenses, leaving the sum of £7O. Upon that the plaintiff left, but subsequently found out that the defen dant had received £2OO on behalf of the plaintiff, and £lO for his expenses. Upon that application was made to Roberts by the plaintiff to know what sum had been re ceived on his behalf, to which Roberts replied that he could not tell how much had been received without reference to his bank-book ; but upon being taxed with the amount he admitted it. The Plaintiff was called, and corroborated the above facts. The defence was, that the defendant was 'engaged from beginning to end by Dr Roberts, who agreed to pay him 20 per cent, on any amount that was received from the company, and if nothing was received then there was to be no charge. Accordingly £2OO was obtained, besides £lO for part of defendant's expenses. Defendant deducted £2O for another portion of them, and Dr Roberts made up the rest of the commission, by allowing £lO to be deducted from the amount of the bill, £BO, making altogether £4O, being 20 per cent upon the amount recovered, £2OO. Two cheques were then paid over to Roberts, one for £lOO for the plain tiff, and £7O fur Roberts's medical bill. Defendant took re. ceipts for them, and thought the matter was properly and fairly carried out, Dr Roberts was called and said—l am a medical man carrying on business in Great Dover-street, Southwark. I attended the plaintiff during his illness as his medical at tendant, and my bill amounted to £BO. The Lord Chief Justice—Do you mean that? Witness—Yes, my lord. What do you, charge, a guinea a visit?—Yea. Is that what you ordinarily chargo a man in the plain tiff's condition in life ?—When I have a case against a rail way company. _ _ The Lord Chief Justice—But, sir, in this case you are not charging the railway company, you are taking it out of this poor man's money. _ _ _ Examination continued—l engaged defendant to apply on the part of the plaintiff for compensation. My bill was sent into the railway company, made up to Dec, 18, when it amounted to £6l- ls. The Lord Chief Justice—Do you mean to say that your bill increased from £64 to £BO between the 18th December and Ist of January ? Witness—Yes. Examination continued—The defendant obtained £2lO from the company, and paid me two cheques, one for £lOO and one for £7O, the former for the plaintiff and the latter for my bill. I paid the plaintiff the £lOO cheque. I did not deduct £3O. He paid me about £lO or £l5, and I re turned him some I 0 U's that he gave me for money hut. Cross-examination continued by Mr James—l knew the defendant personally, and attended him professionally previous to the present affair. £2lO was received from the company. I had £7O out of it. The defendant had £4O and the plaintiff, after paying me the money I lent him, had £3,5 or £OO. The Lord Chief Justice—What did you do for him as his medical attendant ? Witness—l attended him in the ordinary way, and watched the symptoms. (Laughter.) That was all ?—I gavo him some cold lotions. (Renewed laughter.) Examination continued—When plaintiff applied to me to know how much had been obtained from the company I did not tell him that £2lO had been received. I told him £lOO had been obtained for him, and laid a stress on the word " him." (Laughter.) I did not think it was necessary. _ The Lord Chief Justice—What do you say you told the plaintiff when you paid in the £lOO. Did you tell him that was all that had been obtained ? Witness—The interview was very short, and he seemed perfectly satisfied. The Lord Chief. Justice —That has nothing to do with it, sir; your answers may hive satisfied him —very likely they did ; but that is not the question. Examination continued—l often told plaintiff that I should make out the bill to the company a little more than what I should have made against any one else. Those who can pay must pay for those who cannot. (Laughter.) The Lord Chief Justice—That is the reason for the amount of this bill is it ? Witness—Yes. (Laughter.) Re-examination continued—l told the plaintiff that £lOO only had been obtained for him. The Lord Chief Justice—But you knew that to be untrue ? Witness—No, my lord. I said for him. Well, you knew it was untrue ?—That is what I told him however. (Laughter.) The defendant was called and proved how ho was intro duced into the matter through the intervention of Roberts, to whom the money was paid, with a deduction of £49 for commission ; and until the issuing of the writ in the pre sent case he thought the matter had been determined in a proper manner. The Lord Chief Justice in summing up, commented upon the conduct of the witness Roberts and characterised his charges of £SO, reckoned at a guinea a visit, as "nothing more nor loss than an extortion." The question for the jury was whether the defendant was to refund a sum of £lOO, and he was of opinion that as far as the defendant was concerned £lO was all that could be recovered against him, that being the excess that had been charged for com mission. He did not think that the rate of 20 per cent. charged by the defendant was anything outrageous or enormous, taking into consideration the risk the &fence dant ran. The jury, after being locked up for an hour, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £5O. Criminal Statistics of the City, From a Parliamentary return which has just been com pleted by Mr Davie, the assistant-clerk to the magistrates at Guildhall, it appears that the number of persons appre hended and otherwise proceeded against in the Guildhall district for the year ending September 29, 1864, amounts to 6,492, of which 386, consisting of 307 males and 79 females, were charged with indictable offences. Of that number 185 were commited for trial and 201 discharged. The other portion of the gross total represents 6,106 persons who were summarily dealt with for minor offences, of which number 5.431 were males and 675 females. The summary convictions numbered 4,840, of which 4,223 wero fined, 2 ordered to be whipped, 606 committed for various terms of imprisonment not exceeding six months, and the remainder required tofind sureties to keep the peace. The number discharged was 1,266. Among the different classes of offenders proceeded against, it appears there were 83 known thieves, 79 prosti tutes, 188 suspicious characters, 129 habitual drunkards, 5,026 whose previous character was good, 885 whose cha racter was unknown, and 132 vagrants. The offences charged aro principally larcenies and offences under the police and other acts affecting the health and traffic of the city of Lon don, there being only 6 cases of burglary, 18 of forgery, 3 of manslaughter, 1 of bigamy. 4 by bankrupts, 13 of conspi racy, 16 of exposing and selling bad meat, 30 of embezzle ment, and, the most serious item of all, 19 attempts at sui. tide. The above return does not include summonses, war rants and other proceed in7s for poor rates,orders in bastardy, dangerous premises, rail way compensation, small tenements, deserted premises, and a variety of matters of a purely civil character, yet calling forth the exercise of the magisterial functions of the aldermen presiding at this court during the year. Berger, the shepherd statuary, has just termi nated for the bishopric of Nismes four statues of the great orator prelates of the seventeenth oentury—Bossuet, Fens lon, Flechier, and Massillon. They are said to be admir ably executed, SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—If theVolnnteers were not as a rule plain, sensible young Englishmen, each with his daily work to do and his daily cares beginning or begun, they might be spoilt by the compliments which are paid to them by all sorts of distinguished indivi duals and the interest taken in their proceedings by educated and agreeable persons of both serer. Their efficiency, their courage, the influence which their embodiment has exercised on the national policy, the increase of consideration which we all enjoy since foreigners have seen 25,000 of those gray uni forms at a time, and know that there are 160,000 of them in all, are never-failing themes whenever there is an opportunity of introducing them. And what with reviews, and rifle meetings, and field days, fol lowed by some species of conviviality, the opportu nities are numerous enough. Such praise, if not overdone, is exceedingly just, and consequently beneficial, for it renews any flagging energies, and creates an emulation which brings fresh recruits to replace those whom business or caprice or the lassi tude of more peaceful soldiering has seduced from the ranks. One of the most handsome tributes of this kind has just been paid to the force by Sir J. Pakington, and the Volunteers will no doubt appro. ciate the judgment he passes on them after five years' experience. Not in the first gush of admire. tion at a novelty, not for the purpose of encouraging a young and doubtful enterprise, but with a full knowledge of what has been effected by this na tional movement since 1859, Sir J. Pakington corn. pliments the Volunteers as forming a permanent institution of the country. They have, he says, given confidence to their country and delivered us from the recurrence of disgraceful panics. The associations which they form bind together all classes, and en• able them to ;act with a common spirit, notwith standing differences of opinion, education, or private interests. These are praises which the Volunteers may justly value, but a still greater proof of the ree spect with which the Conservative politician regards their force is his attempt to attach to it as one of its necessary branches his favourite Yeomanry. The belief in the Yeomanry is one of those articles of faith which it is not give to all mortals to compre. bend. Perhaps the progress of investigation may enlighten us as to the reason why a certain number of country gentlemen should think the annual mustering for a few days of the rural cavalry to be one of the essential elements of the national we'. fare, Some say it is because the local regiment furnishes a uniform for a levee less ugly than a De puty-Lieutenant's, and less commonplace than a civilian's Court dress. In less fortunate times it used to be alleged that the gentry were not sorry to have something like a military organisation to suppress such disturbances as were then not infre quent We regret that Sir John Pakington gives some countenance to this latter assertion. His en thusiasm for the Yeomanry is so great that he can not refrain from appearing among the Volunteers in the uniform of what he calls " a sister service, the Yeomanry cavalry of England," and ceiling on the Whig Lord-Lieutenant to warn his friends in Downs ingestreet that they had better leave so gallant a body alone. But Sir John was not satisfied with this martial demonstration. If he had contented him. self with awing Lord Leigh and the soberly clad Warwickahire Volunteers with the splendour of his appearance and the vigour of bis defiance he might have produced a great effect, but to condescend to reason was a mistake. We cannot but think that the service which Sir John and the other friends of the Yeomanry are fond of imagining for them is unjust to them, and not likely to increase their popularity with the country. The Liberal Govern ment might retort and say that if it has occasionally " hit out" at the Yeomanry, to use Sir J. Peking ton's expression, it has never given them so severe a blow as those of their admirers who represent them as always ready to act against various classes of artisans and labourers. It is now forty-five years since the indiscretion of a body of Yeomanry, end. ing in the deaths of a number of people at Manches ter, deepened the class hatreds of the time so much that its effects actually remained until within the last few years. A recurrence of such a scene on the occasion of any political or economical dispute between workpeople and their employers would be the most unhappy event imaginable. No one can foretell the evil that a collision of this kind might produce. The multitude is generally infl uence d strongly by dramatic acts of violence, and it is n o t too much teesay that the gen eral good feeling whi c h prevails at present might be broken up, and the, thoughts of the working classes turned in th e direction of organic change, by the errors of a single Yeomanry officer. And yetfor maintaining wehaveSir this John P a kin g ton urging, as a reason force of cavalry, that they might have been lately used, instead of the police, to keep order among the Staffordshire colliers when on strike. "He held that if the Yeomanry had been called out, instead of the police during the late unfortunate strike in the colliery districts, the strike would have ended much sooner than it did." On this subject Sir John Pakington must not expect that the Govern ment or the majority of his countrymen will go with him. Better any temporary inconvenience by the transfer of the police from one district to an. other than the sending of a number of half-disci plined countrymen, under amateur officers, to exer cise a control which requires the greatest judgment and circumspection. The police are accustomed to deal with popular disturbances on all scales; they do not get nervous or savage, they do not see riot in a few shouts or revolution in the rush of an ill-man nered crowd. In all these matters the Yeomanry Cavalry would be the worst judges it would be possible to find, and we hope the day will never come when the regularly constituted forces for the preservation of the public peace will be superseded by what its apologist himself declares to be a branch of the Volunteer army. We may ask, indeed, whether the Volunteers to whom Sir John Peking. ton distributed prizes would like to be called upon to keep order among colliers. If the Yeomanry are fit for that service, and exist especially for it, surely their brother Volunteers are not disqualified? But the answer of the Volunteers all over the country would be the same, They feel that their habits and organisation are not such as fit them to control a discontented multitude. They are en rolled to protect the country, and not to act as amateur police. If, then, the Yeomanry be a branch of their service, it must have the same qualities and the same defects. It must take its stand on the services it is able to render in time of invasion, and can only claim to prolong its existence when it shows that it really can be made the cavalry branch of the Volunteer force. On this part of the subject we will not speak. Oar own impression is that in time of war the Yeomanry or any other Volunteer cavalry would be found of little service, and we believe Lord Herbert was right in endeavouring to confine the Volunteer movement to the raising of infantry regiments. But it the Yeomanry think they can become efficient no one desires to discourage them, and very few will grudge the sum annually voted for their drill if it appears that we obtain for it an efficient force. They are an old and respectable body, but their chiefs and patrons should not challenge attention to their shortcomings, or claim for them a duty the most painful that can be exacted from the regular army, and one which we hope will never again be intrusted to the Yeomanry. HERALD.—To ask a member of Parliament to make a speech to his constituents and then to forbid him to touch upon politics, is, in nine cases out of ten, to ask him to perform an impossibility. What else can he talk about, upon what else would they care to listen to him ? It is given to few of our senators to be authorities upon breeding and drain. ing, and even those few hardly like to speak upon such subjects to an audience every member of which knows quite as much if not more about them. A lecture upon education is all very well at the annual meeting of the mechanics' institute or at a distribu• tion of prizes, but would be altogether out of place at a cattle show dinner. The consequence is that the members break the rule, very much to the satis. faction of their constituents of all shades of politics. But the breach must be made with some delicacy. A member who makes a strong party speech, sea. Boned with violent attacks upon his opponents, will soon be called to order. He may talk politics, he may explain the course he has,pursued during the session, and vindicate the action of his party, but he must contrive to do it in such a way as not to offend or irritate those who hold contrary opi nions. The task is a difficult one, and was never, perhaps, more successfully got over than by Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald, at Horsham, on Wednes day. Mr Fitzgerald knew that the company which had received him so warmly was anxious to hear his views upon the great public questions in the dis cussion of which he has taken so prominent a part, and would have listened with ill-disguised impa tience to a disquisition upon fat beasts. So he talked politics to them, but with so admirable a tact and temper that whilst conclusively vindicating the policy of the Conservative party in the late ses sion, and stoutly maintaining the true principles which should guide the policy of England, he said nothing which could have given offence to the stoutest Whig who might have been present to re. ceive a prize for his success in manufacturing meat. If the policy of the leaders of . the Opposition, in challenging the verdict of Parliament upon the foreign policy of the Government, needed any jussi. fication after debates which proved that not a single member of the Legislature, who was not at the same time a placeholder, disagreed in his heart With the condemnation which the resolutions enunciated, it would be supplied in Mr. Fitzgerald's eloquent exposition of the duties and responsibilities of every Opposition. An Opposition has not to look merely to the chances of getting a mjority. It ought not to be Aotuated polely by the greed of power, and _ with that purpose take no action unless certain Ire, bus lead to an immediate party triumph. It It bear a part in the government of the cou ntry. has to enlighten public opinion, and to infiec e ti `' st the national policy in a right direction, audit 11 1, nt often do this by inviting what in a mere party P . ul ia of view may be considered a defeat, but whe,e . ., st reality is a triumph. The Conservatives dlut"eir carry a resolution which would :lave opponents from power, but they established thlienio' own principles as a rule of foreign policy,wh ic s a Minister can venture to disregard. Whether, a party, they reap the fruits of the course they to e ' l r. or not, they will have rendered an irornenee ; vice to the nation, and the English Conee rvat ' s' but driven t. whose objcct is not the acquisition of piec e, n t the welfare of the English nation, will be contest enough with that solid achievement. The Ti g r n e •di the abiding result of the debates upon th e '-ni 4-1 question is the establishment, as the rule of A.eg4 fish policy, of the great Conservative doctrine, it, non.intervention, or, as we should prefer to nab b l a ; of non-interference. The Conservative party always maintained that England ought not to int %r fore in the domestic affairs of other countries, Iwo intervene in any question, whether by remonetr an e d or force, except when her own interests, consttn„ in the largest sense, compelled her. Lord Painl e d l e stop and the Whigs, on the other hand, have ra n to it their business, when in possession of poWerf e 0 . intermeddle in the affairs of every country , t Z1,,0, courage parties and nationalities, to bully and va ter upon the slightest pretence. But the Consor hi s tive doctrine is caricatured by Mr Cobden a n U, friends, who preach an impossible isolation and most selfish egotism. In condemning the ire Pe r:„ five "" nent fussiness of Earl Russell the country g Co b, approval to the disgraceful cowardice of Mr ba t den. Its voice was pronounced in favour of t hus non-intervention whioh the Conservative par t y . 0 d preached out of office and practised in offee,:ve whether therefore the resolutions of censure lives helped or injured the chances of the Conserva,,t",; for power, they have secured as the policy of 'f a s t . land the doctrine which the Conservatives ba' - ', nl heart to establish. Mr Fitzgerald draws a gl n t,ll picture of the effects of this war upon Austria n B Ol Prussia, and deplores that our int e rvention Wa s ffr , more effective, not merely on account of the 011,1 e; ings of Denmark, but of the check which free d ° o has sustained in Germany. We think his colou rs ; 11 laid on a little too heavily. Prussia is not e%60(),0 under military rule, and her Government Yet I % r s to public opinion and receives an immense suPl i / r OO from it. The recent measures by which Herr 0 Bismarck has trampled upon the minor Sovereign; and even upon Austria, have excited the enthesi ntj o of the Prussian people. Nor can we feel very M u ds regret for the check sustained by the Parligh l u e n j o of Austria and Prussia when we remember tha t w" s f these bodies showed tLemselves utterly regardi rsn e d law, of good faith; and justice; that they denounneir Herr Von Bismarck and Count Rechberg for their reluctance to defy the public opinion of Europ e, ° be y quarrelled bitterly with those Ministers becaus e t ., so , would not ostentatiously set all decency at defisury Whatever condemnation the judgment of Story may pass upon the proceedings of Austria t he Prussia in this iniquitous war will not. fall 1 1 1 3° "„ 0 , heads of the Sovereigns or Ministers of either ct io . try, but upon the people, who have shown t u , h e e ir selves far more brutal and bloodthirsty than r n of rulers. Mr Fitzgerald's views upon the ques t ' ° ,ily retrenchment deserve serious attention. We h, ea „" t , l oo agree with him that the real waste of money JEJT,IOI - army of clerks, and not upon the army " t o diers. Nothing can be more scandalous thaf, h ioli present system of military administration, by to an immense staff of clerks is maintained 0 0 ` 9 c ii.. render the transaction of the smallest piece of °r o d nary business a matter of the utmost diffi culty -Sot annoyance. We trust that Mr Fitzgerald w ell allow the point he has raised to drop, and that L a . the army estimates come before the House of `7 oo t mons he will bring before it this most rear r ibld question. Economy is very desirable, but no a e o n to man would wish to purchase it by a reduc tin v - itss the efficiency of our establishments. As M r ;100 gerald says, we are approaching serious times . '" n ot in which England may have to pay again ti le ,,, r i eet she has so gloriously enacted before; and tr A IS et that emergency we want not an army of ' ll ale mischievous clerks, but soldiers and sailors car-beir of emulating the glorious deeds by which ,cd 1/ 1 forefathers defended England against a N'a n-- arms. COUNTRY MARKETS. - ,P. -h-°- BIRMINGHAM—THURSDAY. There was a less supply of English wheat in WO; market to-day, which moved off slowly ; foreign also erlgt prices the t urn i n f avour o f b uyers. Fine barley Asr i petr dearer; other qu a liti es diffi cult to qu i t. Oats anreteiD sold at last w ee k' s quota ti ons. B eans sold only in n'd —English wheat w a s so ld a t 40 s to 4 18 for white, ti-Se to 41s per 36 ston e f or re d, B arley, new malting, to 3OO 348 per qr ; grinding, 225; to 255. Oats, old, 24s er q r. per 30 stone ; Irish, 19s to 245. Beaus, 38s to 42 0 r peas, 38s to 408 per 36 stone. MANCHESTER.—THURSDAY. ket There was only a moderate attendance at our I nfi i ; o f this morning, and English wheat was taken off 01 ° 1) 0 , t , the currency of last week. American held firi n '''d Pj . buyers were wanting. Flour was in slow demand, a i ll d per best sorts tended in fav,ur of buyers. Oats receded/ jigs 451 b, and oatmeal 3d to 6d per load. Beans an d corn ruled firm. BURY ST. EDMUND'S-IVEDNEsDAV . aria There was a very good supply of wheat at this T A O( to-day, which sold freely at last week's rates. of barley also was good, and fine descriptions broUg late rates. Inferior sorts were dull, EDINBURGH GRAIN—IVEDNEsDA Y • 140 To-day there was a fair supply of country svue- nt NVO ' sold at late rates. Os 3d up, Wi ii Wheat on the top 4s Od up averag e 3j d o h Barley on the top Os Gd do wn .. average Os Ad t ip.,, Oats on the top Os Gd up..... Beans on the top 5s Gd do wn avera ge 2s " • Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ... 540 qrs Sold 411 Ors Barley.... ... .31'27 qrs Sold 1605 qr s Oats Beans ll2 qrs Sold 76 qrs i Average Prices. 18$ 0 Wheat.. Barley 2ss ld 1 8ean5............ e oi Town• made flour sells as follows :—White, 360; superfine, 345; superfine, 325; fine,,3os. GLASGOW—WEDNESDAY. a °IS of b ie D At this day's market the att en d ance was goo d t i iv demand for wheat and flour w a s moderate, both ?' f oot ; may be quoted at last week's prices. Barley dtalatlfor is of buyers, Other articles, with a fair show, he ld rates. Foreign Mail Packet List• MAILS:DUE. 19' De_°"l3, L ev , Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton. ##### D ec. 6 , via Marseilles. ......... pitt. 0, Brazil and Cape Verds, by British p ac ket. ....... Dec' 0. Gape of Good hope, Ascension, and St. Helens' • Doc. , China, Penang, and Singapore, via SouthatoPO n 'pec. ' ' via Marseilles ..• . 0, ' Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton ... neo. ,s, India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton• •Ij e o, i, • via Marseilles* • ' i re°. 6, India (Bombay), via Southampton ............ Dee' 0, via Marseilles ........ i nc. Portuga 1.... Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton ...... peo• , i, via Marseilles ....... . Deo. Newfoundland .... 1. Oporto and Vigo .................. Deo . U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet ••• '. 9 by U.S. packet 0, by Canadian pac k . Des' 0 , W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe .......... De ° ' 15. West Indies and Pacific ~ ....... pas' 0. Bahamas (via New York) ...................... pee' 0. Bermuda (ditto) Cuba and Mexico .......................... Births. elioOt erl GAGE.—On the 7th inst., at 1, BarringtonVillas, Hill, the Hon. Mrs . Gage, of a son. flß ci REDDIE.—On the Bth inst., a t H a mmersmith , ,--rs so p o of a daughter. the SHUTE.—On the 7th inst., at Brompton, Sent' Captain Shute, of a son. d 011. Dt COLTSON,—On the sth inst., at Lower o rviW Coltson, of a son. Marriages. Cli tirel3 ; CUMMINS—SNow.—On the 7th i t at Milboroo tystOtt Mr. W. J. L. Cum • ins t., • pepa r if 0 Cummins, Royal Engineer ~,, o . uo NI to Emily, third daughter of the late Mr. P" Milborno St. Andrew, Dorset. ga ol; LIDDELL—GIBSON.—On the Bth inst., Shelford' 'of i t John Liddell, Esq., Commander R• s ~, eldes t 5011 eld e° b t t ile dot ° John Liddell, K.C.8., to Sydney Eliza 0 of sra daughter of the late George Brook, Surrey. Carew Glibson, C 0 L a E , fl 15: A i , TE Deaths. rY C 0 g .—On the 7th inst., at Greenwich, gen - 77. e o HINGSTON.—On the Bth inst., at 1, Stanhope' gent's-park Joseph et/ gent's••park, llingston, Eeq•, aged 6 6 . „, o tr lIUNTE ' a•—On the 6th inst. at Little Marylebcnv , Mr. John Hunter, aged 95.' sti le" KIRI-terrac I 'ES.—On the Bth inst., at 2, Lower Sero2,oo"/ti,9•P Portman-square, William Senhouse li.irkes, SeyFsq• aged 41. or J3ro SMITH.—On the sth inst., at 51, Thur Joe-square► ton, Lady Smith, aged 62. 00' STRONGE.—On the 2d inst., at Tynan, Abbellotr,ll:oo4 Ireland, Sir John Matthew' Stronge, Bart., D. ' -01-e . - -----/.." ~,,o, . °3 sf ArIPS JO; London: Priraed and Prblished by W1141:0-- 1 4 ,, pi of No. 112, Stran d, Printer, at Tice Sin 4 coVaw Strand, in the Pree inot of the 5a Y , 10 Solve DecciaCt Is'o*. E SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 9, 1864.